What is your bid?
#1
Posted 2014-November-02, 07:40
♠♥♠ BAD bidding may be succesful due to excellent play, but not vice versa. ♦♣♦
Teaching in the BIL TUE 8:00am CET.
Lessons available. For INFO look here: Play bridge with Al
#2
Posted 2014-November-02, 08:32
#3
Posted 2014-November-02, 09:38
aguahombre, on 2014-November-02, 08:32, said:
Michaels shows a) below opening-strength OR b) 16+ HCP imho.
♠♥♠ BAD bidding may be succesful due to excellent play, but not vice versa. ♦♣♦
Teaching in the BIL TUE 8:00am CET.
Lessons available. For INFO look here: Play bridge with Al
#4
Posted 2014-November-02, 10:21
xx1943, on 2014-November-02, 09:38, said:
You might want to revise that opinion. We play "split range" as well, while recognizing "wide-range" to be more popular among the very good and the not-so-good.
But, I really believe Split-range should be either a monster (not just a mere 16+ bean count), or --on the low end--something appropriate to the Vulnerability. When red, this includes some opening bid quality hands.
The in-betweener hands which would just overcall prepared to bid the minor voluntarily at the 3-level would include 16+ hands.
#5
Posted 2014-November-02, 10:29
#6
Posted 2014-November-02, 11:09
fromageGB, on 2014-November-02, 10:29, said:
We can easily see that most likely RHO's hearts will be raised to some level. Your oppportunity to bid again here might well be at the 4-level. I don't like to mastermind, but would prefer to let my passed-hand partner in on the nature of my distribution, knowing I saw we were Red vs. White, and be the wildcard.
#7
Posted 2014-November-02, 12:15
aguahombre, on 2014-November-02, 11:09, said:
It'a an argument, but I would not be wanting to bid spades at the 4-level, nor would I want my partner to compete that high if he couldn't open a weak 2. Better to keep quiet about the spades, in my view, and let the distribution be a surprise for declarer - hopefully a nasty one.
#9
Posted 2014-November-03, 01:14
#10
Posted 2014-November-03, 01:50
#11
Posted 2014-November-03, 03:02
♠♥♠ BAD bidding may be succesful due to excellent play, but not vice versa. ♦♣♦
Teaching in the BIL TUE 8:00am CET.
Lessons available. For INFO look here: Play bridge with Al
#12
Posted 2014-November-03, 12:39
xx1943, on 2014-November-03, 03:02, said:
Some people would prefer to show 5-5 in the two suits rather than something like 4-1-6-2.
#14
Posted 2014-November-03, 14:11
Partner is a passed hand. We rate not to make game opposite a minimum competitive decision by him, which is a concern that the split-range advocates have when holding an in-between hand. Advancer can hold a fairly good hand and be conservative because we are either weak or will take another call, and he can catch up. His being a passed hand slightly reduces that fear, since one of the 'go-low' hand-types is opening values with no real fit. He can't hold that now.
Our spades are very weak. Overcalling spades overstates the suit and probably loses the diamonds forever. We can expect more heart bidding....yes, maybe partner has 5 of them but the betting money is that the opps can bid hearts to at least the 3-level, and we are never going to be comfortable showing diamonds later, having started spades. We could bid spades then double but that suggests something like 6=1=3=3 or 51(43) and we'll get to a bad 5-2 spade fit rather than a good 5-3 diamond fit all too often (and other bad things could happen as well).
Overcalling diamonds then bidding spades shows a failure to understand shape. Yes, it is probably 'convenient', but we don't want partner pulling to diamonds on 3=3 hands and probably not on 3=4 or even 3=5 hands, since we have to take more tricks in diamonds to avoid a minus score (possibly a big one).
Overcalling diamonds and never bidding spades shows a failure to understand the scoring table
As it happens, I used to be a split-range bidder, but no more. I'm happy with a vulnerable michaels, especially with such a weak spade suit.
#15
Posted 2014-November-03, 15:19